I can't resist to imagine it the other way.
Imagine a toffy British ambassador in British Raj, say General Napier, going to an Indian war memorial and laying down a bay leaf for the fallen soldiers during one of their countless massacres/genocides (e.g. Jammu).
Kinda bonkers.
On behalf of the people of Blackburn, I had the honour of laying our Remembrance Tribute in Parliament’s Constituency Garden of Remembrance.
We remember all those from Blackburn who gave their lives in service to our country, and honour all who made the ultimate sacrifice. Their courage and sacrifice must never be forgotten. Lest we forget.
Everywhere I look, there is yet more third-worldist credentialism running amok in the UK and a continued decline of meritocracy and thinking.
Arguing that your political leaders should have climbed higher and higher up a greasy pole is utterly pathetic third-world behavior. It mirrors politics seen all over India and Africa, where it's rife to see "Vote for Minister Atwa OBE MD. PhD OLE CBE!" all over bus stops during election cycles.
Major climbdown that was obvious from a million miles away.
No product that is attached to a political cause does well, as any marketing intern with a single braincell will tell you.
Cybertruck is to a business what Dragon Age The Veilguard was to Bioware.
Of course, key to understanding the post-ww2 left-wing's unusual allyship with Islam (e.g. green party and labour) is the realization that western child education has a laser focus on negatives like transatlantic slavery and the holocaust, and does not mention a single time either Stalin's pogroms, famines, arabic slavery of Africans and castating them en masse, Greek's explusion of Islam in 1923, oppression of women, all the arabic genocides (there are literally too many to even begin), and all the other vital parts of history.
I would know this because everyone born after 1945 in the UK experienced the same education, including me. It has a bias. First, it overwhelmingly focuses on teaching the negatives of european culture - purporting it as uniquely despotic, uniquely colonialistic, uniquely imperialistic, uniquely oppressive group of people; people who gassed millions in germany and stole septillions from India. Secondly, the only mentions of foreign groups of people that we get taught about amounts to how the kumbaya dance, a lion king VHS (i'm old, 'kay?), and "wakanda forever" type shit.
For example, UK children get taught that europeans enslaved the world, gassed milions of jews, colonized Indians, and nuked Japan to ash. From my memory, the only classes about africans were about how they build mud huts and what zebras look like, and the only classes about Arabs were how their women (are forced to) dress.
We get taught this from as early as 10 years old. I distinctly remember the gas chamber pictures being made to see in textbooks and on war museum school trips, and it being considerably traumatizing. Do we get made to see equivalent images of lines of black slaves queuing up for arab slavemasters to chop off their testicles? Nope.
Even an idiot can get it that most children that get put through this education regime would eventually grow up to become an incredibly brainwashed, seething, anti-western loony. This is why I always say "post-ww2 leftism" - it is not the leftism (progressivism) that our great-grandfathers would recognize pre-1945.
The right would be wise to understand this mechanism behind the left's bizarre sympathy for what is actually their apparent arch-nemisis - Islam - a far-right, ultra-conservative religious-political regime/institution.
The right must understand this if it is to have any long-term succees, since victory is written by the winners, then after, written by their children.
It is times like this that "islamocommunism" really sort of makes sense.
Utimately, it stems from the child education programs of the post-ww2 cultural regime - "white" = "empire + slavery + hitler + ..." and "brown" = "oppressed + good + exotic + amazing".
Muslims are generally brown, hence the unlikely allyship of "left" and "islam".
I've been saying for years personally that eventually the tactics of the left - in this specific case, vague blobs of NGOs - will slowly trickle to the right.
Next up, NGOs to provide legal defence + private security for right-wing figures, just like the left has done for 81yrs
A few of you will have seen my name pop up on Sky News and some might be wondering why they said I “voluntarily left Restore.”
I’m still voting Restore as soon as I have the opportunity and I do think they’ve improved their game since the summer when there were clearly a few wobbles.
But I did step down as branch organiser at the end of September. Myself and a couple of close friends decided to create The Wyvern Fellowship (@WyvernFellows), the first nationalist NGO our country has seen in recent years. Setting this up and putting in the work of growing this organisation (a pretty gruelling task at times!) meant I no longer had the time to devote to running the Solihull branch of Restore.
We thought this would be a better use of time because as much as electioneering and leafleting has its use, there are going to be problems if a nationalist party gets into government without an institutional and economic network to support it. We saw that no one (or very few people) was really doing this, so we took it upon ourselves to try and get the ball rolling.
Our ultimate aim is to create the business, professional and legal networks which will stand up for the interests of our people in the midst of this relentless infestation of charities and NGOs who actively work against Britain. These people are swimming in cash they’re using to destroy our country and so far, we have no such advantage. The more patriots who join us, the sooner we can deliver on the projects we’re planning and expand them further.
We need to Restore Britain, but to do this we can’t limit ourselves to electoral politics. We need to do more.
Firstly, his opinions are not that. It is remigration. No skin color involved. But anyway.
A reply to this was very prudent - saying this is equivalent to saying that women dressing provocatively are asking to be raped.
They fail to realize that a "country" is not a thinking feeling organism. It doesn't "treat" anyone. A country is just a group of people with borders. Anglo-saxons have treated minorities extremely well as world standards go. Best in the world, in fact, as any historian would tell you. We have no genocides, pogroms, mass killing fields, or anything else of that matter under our belt.
The issue native British people have is that the soon-to-be new majority of the UK will be made up of third-world people, and it is quite common in third-world cultures for millions of people to just die in a quarterly genocide. It's common for a whole town to be rounded up and shot because they offended some local warlord minister. It's common to be rounded up into "re-education" prison camps, like China does. Have you seen what goes on in Africa or India?
The native british are afraid because a third world culture generally treats minorities with death. This is not an exaggeration, history, even recent, is full of such irrefutable cases.
unavailable
Thinking about it a bit more, this is purely to do either 1 or 2 of these 2 things:
1. A free GCSE bung to the hundreds of thousands of new immigrant Ukranians and their expected ~million offspring over the next few decades.
2. Boost the number of lower-class northerners (this won't be a class in any private school obviously) who know some basic Ukranian so that they can be easy donbas dronefodder.
Whichever it is or both - it is just yet more undemocratic clientelism, yet more politics-by-voting-bloc, yet more bungs, yet more subversive treason, yet more...
Proud to announce that students in England will be able to study Ukrainian at GCSE.
It’s a chance for pupils to explore Ukraine’s rich culture and history and, for the Ukrainian community to remain connected to their heritage.
This is another step in our enduring support for Ukraine as part of the 100 Year Partnership 🇺🇦🇬🇧
Well this is rather psychotic.
I no longer expect anything else from these Angela-Bridget-Lucy types. Just like the Conservatives style of governance, it is simply undemocratic, unconstitutional treason.
Proud to announce that students in England will be able to study Ukrainian at GCSE.
It’s a chance for pupils to explore Ukraine’s rich culture and history and, for the Ukrainian community to remain connected to their heritage.
This is another step in our enduring support for Ukraine as part of the 100 Year Partnership 🇺🇦🇬🇧
It is a shame that UK right-wing politics failed to counter post-2014 leftist psychoticism with such argument and debate.
All the seething and bile from the left about the recent UK immigration changes are ultimately all about this.
You need to read this in order to understand what the theory of mind is. Particularly the apartment analogy.
I was talking to a left-wing greek woman (lives in London now) the other day about mass immigration to the UK, Islamism, and whether mass deportations are moral or immoral.
I posed to them that Europeans - even those that are left-wing - generally consider neither the Spanish Reconquista as immoral nor the 1923 mass deportation of Turks from Greece as immoral. I was told that these were simply cases where "the native population fought against historical oppressors/invaders".
Despite both being expressly to expel Islam from Europe and ensure greater ethnic homogeneity - as "far-right nazi" as you can possibly be - they were "moral" because they were cases of "resistance".
So I asked them: "So why do you view Restore's policies as far-right and deeply immoral but these historical events as centrist and moral? What is the difference?"
Their answer orbited exactly what @emergenteffects alludes to, which is this idea of "contract" or "the law".
She said: "The UK government signed a contract with immigrants, most of them now citizens, and it is always immoral to go back on a contract that was signed by two willing parties."
After hearing this, it became obvious that it was a "contract by the government" that turned a mass deportation/expulsion event from "moral and centrist" to "immoral and far-right extremist". I wanted them to try to explain why they thought this was logical.
So I told them some facts about how in every poll conducted in the last 100 years, the native British population has voted against mass immigration, and therefore these "contracts" have been traitorous. Because treason is immoral, then by extension, these contracts are immoral, and then by extension, the action these contracts permit - mass-migration - is also immoral.
I even gave them an analogy about an apartment:
You live in a building with 10 apartments and there is a building contract that says that new tenants can only move in if existing tenants agree. (this is "democracy")
9 are filled with tenants, 1 apartment is empty. The building manager asks the 9 tenants whether they want the 10th apartment filled with a new tenant that will need lots of money and free food and other free resources extracted from them as a new "building tax" to support the new tenant, and they will generally be a bit antisocial. (this is the "immigrants are overwhelmingly fiscally negative" ONS data)
Hearing this rather bleak prospect, they obviously respond with a resounding "no". The tenant is aware of this result, and yet doesn't care. The building manager also ignores this result, violates the building contract, and gets the new tenant to sign a move-in contract anyway. The new tenant proceeds to move in.
I asked them: "Is it now immoral for the 9 native tenants to forcefully kick out the new 10th tenant that moved in against the building contract?"
As I have said many times, what we call "modern left-wing politics" is the alias we use today for the Post-WW2 Cultural Regime. Amongst many traits (the most prominent of which is blank slatism), it is post-history. Subscribers to this regime ultimately do not view any year before 1945 as real in any meaningful sense. For them, history simply began in 1945, and their entire world-view, morality framework, belief system, politics, and even personality, are a microcosmic clone of all the institutions of the Post-WW2 Cultural Regime (UN, G7, NATO, EU, etc.).
This is why subscribes to this regime can view the mass-migration of Muslims to the Iberian Peninsula against the will of the native Visigothic populace as immoral and the subsequent Spanish Reconquista as moral self-determination, and yet contra to this, view the mass-migration of Muslims to Britain against the will of the native British populace as *moral* and the potential mass deportations as *immoral* - completely the opposite stance and yet fundamentally identical events.
The only difference is this concept of "a bureaucratic institution permitted it".
Many left-wing reactions to this debate - which is fundamentally about third-world mass migration to the UK - orbit around only one shared reasoning: The Rich and Elite like Nigel Farage push anti-immigration because blaming immigrants for UK poverty distracts the people from their corruption, tax dodging, and other evil antics.
But this is so easily debunked.
If you want, there is, firstly, the long way: the tax paid by The Rich and Elite are at record highs. The reason why it doesn't seem to go that far is because UK government expenditure has risen to levels that have never been seen before. That expenditure is not in subsidies or tax breaks for the Rich and Elite, because if it was, then UK businesses would be doing great - which they aren't - and UK businesses would be paying lower tax - which they aren't. We are at record high bankruptcies (outside of disasters).
And then, if you prefer, there is, secondly, the short way: It is is in the best interest of the Rich and Elite - who overwhelmingly represent business owners and landlords - to A) flood the labor market with cheap slaves that will accept poverty wages and beds in sheds, and B) flood the property market with millions more people who all need housing.
Both floods do psychotic levels of harm to UK middle and lower classes, and are of unimaginable benefit to the Rich and Elite.
It is actually one of the bizarre aspects of the post-WW2 cultural regime that it managed to flip left-wing politics around to mean the opposite of what it used to mean before 1945: Progressivism. Before 1945, left-wing politics would be on the side of the lower and middle classes, defending their jobs, wages, and homes.
The Rich and Elite love all of this, of course. They have successfully tricked the left into destroying their own jobs and murdering their own property market, making jobs and homes nigh unreachable for millions of natives.
Care homes, the NHS, and the london property market are ground zero for these two phenomena.
It is probably of some reassurance that now even your average dadboomer - the first generation raised in the post-WW2 cultural regime - is starting to pipe up.
What a depressing Labour u-turn on the extension of ILR for Boriswave care workers. It’s not just the huge cost heading our way, it’s the way that care workers are singled out for the sentimental treatment we usually reserve for NHS nurses. For our own benefit as a country we need the average carer to be better paid, better trained, and higher status (I recently wrote a book partly about this The Care Dilemma). But we don’t have to pretend they are all angels: there are some who are v good, most who are average and too many who are useless, as in any walk of life. The immigrant carers are coming here for a better life from poorer often failing societies not because they love looking after British people. In my own last hospital stay most the care assistants were Boriswave women, mostly from Africa - some decent some indifferent - but ALL spoke quite poor and v heavily accented English that was sometimes hard to understand and unless I spoke slowly and deliberately they struggled to understand me. This is obviously a sensitive issue that many people experience but don’t feel able to talk about (though it must be reflected in those low satisfaction surveys), partly because a carer has helped you when you are vulnerable and there is a kind of reflex gratitude even if the care has actually been a bit sloppy or incompetent (and you also feel you’re getting it free so shouldn’t moan, even if you’re paying more and more in tax). Yet it’s crazy that we are spending billions subsidising this when we could be using the money to incentivise British ppl, who speak the language fluently and understand the culture, to do these jobs.
There is so many interconnected layers of irony and backstory that I have no idea what is going on with these midterms.
Every post is ironic and just when I thought I deciphered one it was just a spongebob meme.
Can a yank please elaborate as to what it is it do?
The increasing attention these posts get is reassuring to me that, maybe one day, I will succeed in compromising the UK government's propaganda that is used ot cover up mistakes, maintain legitimacy, prevent public disorder, and, perhaps prevent socioeconomic collapse.
The UK government can double taxes tomorrow, ruin everyone, double the size of the state - literally anything - and ZERO of the charts you see on the BBC will meaningfully change. Their charts are carefully designed to conceal all socioeconomic decline.
You really think that their "growth" number magically stays between "0.0%" and "0.2%", no matter which government, which policy, or which geopolitical reality exists?
Do you think it's by accident that people out of a job are, bewilderingly, excluded from unemployment and economic inactivity figures, keeping them lower?
Do you think it's by accident that they carefully rearrange what goes into CPI, keeping it lower? Ever find it a bit odd that they subsidize the production of a specific product one year and then next year's CPI basket of goods magically contains that very item?
Ever find it a bit strange that they only show "GDP" charts and never anything remotely like real terms purchasing power?
The only economic number that isn't - nay, cannot be - fake is MPTPP - Median Post-Tax Purchasing Power. Simply, it is how much *stuff* you can buy with the median salary after all taxes are subtracted.
No government in the world, nay, no entity in the universe, can fake this. It is not part of our laws of nature that someone can just write on a piece of paper and 10 million extra hamburgers suddenly pop into existence. Neither can the same just make 10 million extra bags of rice exist. Rather, stuff has to be made, services have to be delivered, or they have to be traded by offering sellers something else in return.
As the UK gets poorer and poorer by lower productivity and less people being fiscally positive, less stuff gets made, less services get delivered, and less net positive value is generated to trade for stuff and services from the world.
So stuff and services get more scarce, so they get more expensive, and the UK government printing yet more pieces of paper or borrowing yet more money doesn't mean that there is suddenly more stuff around.
This is ultimately why UK MPTPP has declined so much since the GFC. Consecutive UK governments have failed to manage the country effectively, impoverishing us all. See my attached infographic for exact how bad this truly is.
We are *much less* socioeconomically well off than our parents, and that is truly deeply depressing fact - one that is very well hidden and very deliberately so by the government class.
All these stats are fake, because A) inflation is controlled by the government, and B) it excludes all taxation.
If you simply determine how much post-tax purchasing power the median UK earner has, there has been a deeply concerning decline.
Of course, they don't want to show this, because it would delegitimize UK government and cause a panic.
Yes, the john lewis christmas advert features a boomer getting a london immigrant rickshaw ride. Yes, this is with the obvious intent to normalize them to UK children so that they don't oppose them when they grow up.
We are more in the thick of it than I initially expected.
This is a rather concerning escalation in tactics. I suppose both the left and the right of politics are starting to realize that, of course, it is with gen z and gen alpha that the future lies. Nevertheless, grooming children with propaganda is always when political causes start to get really nasty.
Ducking hell they even put the immigrant rickshaw riders in it. I have no idea if it's ironic + based or serious + woke. Perhaps that was their point? Where's that boomer interview clip? "Eventually things will get so weird, we will have to talk about how weird it all is"
Nope...not for me! 😠
This years John Lewis Christmas ad, in summary.
Nan needs a hug, rude kids barge past her, ignoring her completely.
Kids don't like Nans childhood presents, so Nan goes out shopping to John Lewis to buy things they like to placate them.
Nan eventually gets her hug, when the spoilt grandkids get the presents they want.
Oh, and a rickshaw ride round London for good measure!
An absolutely dreadful story of kids attitudes towards the elderly today, and blatant consumerism - I for one, won't be shopping there this year! 🎁 🎅🎄
Fails to realize, buried in his logic, why the UK government and rich classes allowed "nearly all staff were POC" to become a reality through mass immigration.
Completely fails to realize that there is an obvious motive here.
I was talking to a left-wing greek woman (lives in London now) the other day about mass immigration to the UK, Islamism, and whether mass deportations are moral or immoral.
I posed to them that Europeans - even those that are left-wing - generally consider neither the Spanish Reconquista as immoral nor the 1923 mass deportation of Turks from Greece as immoral. I was told that these were simply cases where "the native population fought against historical oppressors/invaders".
Despite both being expressly to expel Islam from Europe and ensure greater ethnic homogeneity - as "far-right nazi" as you can possibly be - they were "moral" because they were cases of "resistance".
So I asked them: "So why do you view Restore's policies as far-right and deeply immoral but these historical events as centrist and moral? What is the difference?"
Their answer orbited exactly what @emergenteffects alludes to, which is this idea of "contract" or "the law".
She said: "The UK government signed a contract with immigrants, most of them now citizens, and it is always immoral to go back on a contract that was signed by two willing parties."
After hearing this, it became obvious that it was a "contract by the government" that turned a mass deportation/expulsion event from "moral and centrist" to "immoral and far-right extremist". I wanted them to try to explain why they thought this was logical.
So I told them some facts about how in every poll conducted in the last 100 years, the native British population has voted against mass immigration, and therefore these "contracts" have been traitorous. Because treason is immoral, then by extension, these contracts are immoral, and then by extension, the action these contracts permit - mass-migration - is also immoral.
I even gave them an analogy about an apartment:
You live in a building with 10 apartments and there is a building contract that says that new tenants can only move in if existing tenants agree. (this is "democracy")
9 are filled with tenants, 1 apartment is empty. The building manager asks the 9 tenants whether they want the 10th apartment filled with a new tenant that will need lots of money and free food and other free resources extracted from them as a new "building tax" to support the new tenant, and they will generally be a bit antisocial. (this is the "immigrants are overwhelmingly fiscally negative" ONS data)
Hearing this rather bleak prospect, they obviously respond with a resounding "no". The tenant is aware of this result, and yet doesn't care. The building manager also ignores this result, violates the building contract, and gets the new tenant to sign a move-in contract anyway. The new tenant proceeds to move in.
I asked them: "Is it now immoral for the 9 native tenants to forcefully kick out the new 10th tenant that moved in against the building contract?"
As I have said many times, what we call "modern left-wing politics" is the alias we use today for the Post-WW2 Cultural Regime. Amongst many traits (the most prominent of which is blank slatism), it is post-history. Subscribers to this regime ultimately do not view any year before 1945 as real in any meaningful sense. For them, history simply began in 1945, and their entire world-view, morality framework, belief system, politics, and even personality, are a microcosmic clone of all the institutions of the Post-WW2 Cultural Regime (UN, G7, NATO, EU, etc.).
This is why subscribes to this regime can view the mass-migration of Muslims to the Iberian Peninsula against the will of the native Visigothic populace as immoral and the subsequent Spanish Reconquista as moral self-determination, and yet contra to this, view the mass-migration of Muslims to Britain against the will of the native British populace as *moral* and the potential mass deportations as *immoral* - completely the opposite stance and yet fundamentally identical events.
The only difference is this concept of "a bureaucratic institution permitted it".
Why is it that immigration policy is the major area where any changes to the rules are seen as some kind of affront (but only when it moves towards more restriction)? Income tax was always supposed to be temporary. Government policy changes all the time. That’s life!
Parliament is sovereign and not bound by its predecessors. If the change is necessary, it must be done.
Why only 45 trillion dollars? If you are going aim high, at least make it worthwhile. Why not 67 septillion dollars? Why not 92 gorbillion?
Oh the beauty and wealth that the Indian populace could have enjoyed if not for the pesky empire.
Yous could have even continued Sati without our unwanted intrusion upon your cultural delights.
Napier was simply butting in! The railroads were simply imposing on the nature.
South Africa, another great example of this too! Oh what Johannesburg would become without european governance. Oh wait.
Of some rather great concern is the growing number of frail old pensioners who are being acosted and brainwashed by leafleting pro-palestine propagandists in order to conscript them into doing illegal activity.
They do this to take advantage of them, as they get videos of them getting arrested for doing said illegal activity (obviously). This is done in the hope of creating propaganda clips that tries to trick the public into a "think of the grannies! Let's support Gaza!" emotional reaction.
I think that, eventually, this is going to have to end, as it is abuse at such an egregious level on an ever growing scale. It seems like over the years, the desparation of the pro-pal cause grows and their death rattles shake ever harder. Eventually, they'll start putting elderly in very dangerous positions to get them seriously hurt or killed in order to get a money shot on video.
